Daily Alert: When Failure Is the Only Option, It's Time to Change Policy

The Lead

When Failure Is the Only Option, It's Time to Change Policy

by Dennis Speed (EIRNS) — Sep. 03, 2026

How would it be possible for today’s trans-Atlantic analysts, proceeding from their prevailing geopolitical axioms, to understand the actual strategic import of the various statements made, and resultant actions being taken, either at the recently-concluded 26th Council of Heads of State of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or at the ongoing September 1-4 Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok? In this moment of deepest strategic crisis, when precise evaluations could determine, in the short term, the very fate of civilization, how badly or well are those analysts serving either the leaders, those that must become leaders, or the people of our respective nations? Clearly, a higher standard of intelligence and deliberation must prevail among all of us, if the world is to survive in the short term.

In Vladivostok, at the Eastern Economic Forum, Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto observed, “The Russian Far East and Indonesia are both very vast….it takes many hours to fly from one end of our territories to the other. We know that the capital city can sometimes feel very far from the frontier communities. But Vladivostok also feels rather close to my home. The same great ocean, the Pacific Ocean, touches the shores of Russia and also touches the shores of Indonesia. The Pacific Ocean does not separate us. The Pacific Ocean connects us. It is not a wall between us. It must be a highway between our two economies.”

“Not a wall, but a highway:” Fools may choose to read this as a mere rhetorical statement, “from a nation of the South.” They will not evaluate it as an idea, as an expression of an emerging, perhaps monumental strategic change, or as a principle of potential world-change. Principles, of morality or otherwise, are non-existent for most proponents of geopolitics. And after all, when it comes to such nations as Indonesia, in the words of one idol of such people, Henry Kissinger, “History is not made in the South.” That is what the acolytes of Kissinger, “Mr. Realpolitik,” the mascot of Britain’s Chatham House, foolishly prefer to think—at least up until now. Since Kissinger’s day, things have gotten even worse; in this latter-day era of Western non-diplomacy, the knuckle-dragger nerds of the State Department, and their fellow rehab cases at the Department of War, after screaming their “policies” toward Africa, Asia, Ibero-America, and, where they can get away with it Russia, mutter reassuringly to themselves: “ideas are for wimps.”

More intelligent minds and hearts need to prevail.

Today, the Executive Intelligence Review will present its emergency roundtable, “An Alternative to War and Looting in the Americas.” Representatives from Brazil, China, Spain, Germany, Peru, Guyana, the United States and other nations will delineate, and deliberate upon, a knowable pathway out of strategic disaster that stands before the world, ready to be implemented, if the courage and political will is able to be mustered to take it. As the invitation states:

“The U.S. should cooperate with China in great projects in Ibero-America (as in the whole world), and seek unity among a concert of sovereign nations with politically differing governments, just as John Quincy Adams and Franklin Delano Roosevelt did—the latter in close alliance with Brazil’s Getulio Vargas and Mexico’s Lázaro Cárdenas. LaRouche promoted as the flagship project for this Ibero-American integration the construction of a Bioceanic Rail Corridor, such as the one from Peru’s Chancay port on the Pacific to the Brazilian port of Ilhéus on the Atlantic, a project currently under active consideration by the governments of Brazil, Peru, and China.”

With respect to this week’s developments at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) meeting, and the now-ongoing Vladivostok summit, contrast to the standard “Brand X” geopolitical punditry Executive Intelligence Review’s 50-year track record, and “counter-analysis.” Include, in that contrast, economist and statesman Lyndon LaRouche’s 1983 “A 50-Year Development Policy for the Indian-Pacific Oceans Basin.” That document covers the period from 1983-2033–over four decades ago, to seven years from now—and starts from the opposite premise to that of Henry Kissinger. History can indeed be made in the South, and everywhere else on the planet, through the collaboration of independent, sovereign nations in the construction of world corridors of economic development. It is that to which the policies of the EEF, the SCO and the BRICS nations all point, with whatever imperfections and qualifications. The hatred for Lyndon LaRouche on the part of the financial establishment of the City Of London and Wall Street was in part due to his fierce advocacy of the right of the Global South, and all people, to advanced economic development, which he characterized as the willful increase in the potential relative population density of humanity.

China, Indonesia, Japan, Vietnam, the Republic of Korea, India, and Myanmar sent the “largest delegations ever” to the Eastern Economic Forum this year in Vladivostok, with many other nations in attendance. Russia’s Vladimir Putin gave an extensive keynote to the 7000-plus-persons in attendance. Putin announced, among other things, that “we are launching a business support system unprecedented in scale and scope. Starting January 1, 2027, a single preferential regime will be applied throughout the Far East and the Arctic. Under it, support instruments will not be linked to a specific special region or advanced economic zone, but will be tailored specifically for different types of activities throughout the Far Eastern region.”

The Vladivostok meeting, and the Russian President, would have been more than pleased to have invited some representatives of the trans-Atlantic Sector, preferably from the United States, to echo and amplify that message. But at this time, no such vision presently exists, at least visibly, in any government, or meaningful government faction in any government from the self-doomed, self-immolating “NATO nations” of the Anglosphere. A new independent voice, such as that expressed in the American Presidential candidacy of Diane Sare, and the Congressional candidacy of New York City’s Jose Vega, must appear, not only in the United States but in many other trans-Atlantic nations as a clear vocal opposition to the Anglosphere’s insanity.

Colonialism is over. The once-practiced “diplomacy of supremacy”—military, financial, sometimes ethnic/"racial”—has come to an end. No one is listening any longer. It was President Putin who said two years ago in Valdai, “It is my deep conviction that the only new international system possible is one embracing polyphony, where many tones and many musical themes are sounded together to form harmony. If you like, we are moving towards a world system that is going to be polyphonic rather than polycentric, one in which all voices are heard and, most importantly, absolutely must be heard.” 250 years ago, that was an American ideal. Let that now be the policy-outlook in South America, North America, and worldwide. The sick, dying colonial mentality, and resultant policies, for which failure is now “the only option,” must take a back seat to humanity.